ONTD Political

Viagra: "The Drug for Life"

12:52 am - 05/02/2012
Minnesota Senator Who Sponsored Vetoed Anti-Abortion Pill Bill Calls Viagra A ‘Drug For Life’

Minnesota Gov. Mark Dayton (D) has vetoed an anti-abortion bill that would have required a doctor to be present for a woman to take the abortion-inducing drug RU-486, effectively banning “tele-med” abortions and disproportionately affecting women in rural communities. Dayton wrote in his veto letter that patient safety should always be a concern, but “a veto is warranted on legislation because it is driven by a specific political ideology rather than a broad-based concern for protecting all patients.”

Indeed, during debate about the legislation, a Democratic state senator asked why RU-486 should be regulated instead of erectile dysfunction medication. Sen. Paul Gazelka (R), the bill’s sponsor, said Viagra is a “wonderful drug” that “helps create life.” RH Reality Check’s Robin Marty asked Gazelka to clarify his comments about Viagra, and he said in response:

"comparing Viagra to RU-486 was comparing apples and oranges or more like comparing life and death. Viagra is a wonderful medical advancement in that can help couples with sexual disfunction issues…it can even help in producing life. RU486 always destroys life by taking the life of the unborn child."

Gazelka did not respond to Marty’s questions about whether he would sponsor a bill to collect information about men who are prescribed Viagra, similar to “databases created in various other states to gather information on women who obtain abortions.”

Gazelka’s bill and his ensuing comments about Viagra highlight the unfair burden placed on women who seek abortions and related health care. State regulations continue to add additional hurdles women must overcome to access abortions and contraception, while no similar measures block the availably of Viagra for men.

Source: http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/05/01/474419/minnesota-state-senator-abortion-viagra/
darsynia 2nd-May-2012 04:03 pm (UTC)
I don't know if you really want to make this argument. If I were a well-off white male, yeah, I probably would have a different perspective, because I would be privileged enough to not have to deal with the issues women have to deal with, nor would I have to worry about balancing my sexual desires with the desire not to get pregnant.

Arguing that of course our perspectives would change if our circumstances did doesn't really diminish the point that other posters are making, IMO. They're saying that the lawmaker's privilege and lack of perspective leads him to an opinion that doesn't place enough value on body autonomy. If I were in his shoes, the same privilege and lack of perspective could, quite possibly, lead me to the same opinions. It doesn't take away the fact that the opinions he holds about this issue devalues women's body autonomy.
(no subject) - Anonymous
telemann 3rd-May-2012 05:33 am (UTC)
Privilege, Power, and Difference by Allan G. Johnson. Ph.D. University of Minnesota. White Privilege: Essential Readings on the Other Side of Racism by Paula S. Rothenberg (Senior Fellow at The Murphy Institute, City University of
New York and Professor Emerita at William Patterson University of New Jersey.) Race, Class, and Gender in the United States: An Integrated Study. Same author.

Not hard to find this on Amazon. So simple, a caveman could do it.
(no subject) - Anonymous
telemann 3rd-May-2012 05:47 am (UTC)
I don't know, those are pretty good primers on the subject written by academics who are experts on the subject matter you asked about. There are a lot more if you dig around and look.
(no subject) - Anonymous
telemann 3rd-May-2012 05:55 am (UTC)
Are you a climate change skeptic? Do you believe that climate change is caused by human industrial activities. I only ask because if you have a hard time with something that ...settled, you're going to have a much more difficult time with subject matter as nuanced as sociology etc.
(no subject) - Anonymous
telemann 3rd-May-2012 06:21 am (UTC)
Oh because you do believe in human based global warming and the science that backs it up?
(no subject) - Anonymous
telemann 3rd-May-2012 06:25 am (UTC)
Very good. Carry on and tally ho.
(no subject) - Anonymous
telemann 3rd-May-2012 06:57 am (UTC)
You're being pedantic again. Stop while you're ahead.
(no subject) - Anonymous - Expand
(no subject) - Anonymous - Expand
(no subject) - Anonymous - Expand
fornikate 3rd-May-2012 02:10 pm (UTC)
This page was loaded Mar 24th 2018, 8:13 pm GMT.